ArticleJournal of insect science (Online)2014
Mating disruption of Planococcus ficus (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae) in vineyards using reservoir pheromone dispensers.
Article in Journal of insect science (Online), 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 51 citations in OpenAlex.
- Unraveling key biological aspects of Delottococcus aberiae (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae) to enhance pest management.Journal of insect science (Online) · 2026Article
- Review
- New Monoterpenoid as the Sex Pheromone of Spanish Populations of the Longtailed MealybugJournal of agricultural and food chemistry · 2024Article
- Mating behavior of Pseudococcus calceolariae and Pseudococcus longispinus (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae): are asexual reproduction and hybridization possible?Journal of insect science (Online) · 2023Article
- Pheromone Deployment Strategies for Mating Disruption of a Vineyard Mealybug.Journal of economic entomology · 2021Article
- Mating Disruption ofInsects · 2021Article
- Article
- Identification ofInsects · 2020Article
- Multiple Mating in the Citrophilous MealybugInsects · 2019Article
- Managing the vine mealybug, Planococcus ficus, through pheromone-mediated mating disruption.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mating disruption field experiments to control the vine mealybug, Planococcus ficus (Signoret) (Hemiptera: Pseudococcidae), were carried out in 2008 and 2009 in two commercial vineyards in Sardinia (Italy). The effectiveness of mating disruption was evaluated by testing reservoir dispensers loaded with 100 mg (62.5 g/ha) and 150 mg (93.8 g/ha) of the sex pheromone in 2008 and 2009, respectively. The number of males captured in pheromone traps, the P. ficus population density and age structure, the parasitism rate, the percentage of ovipositing females, and the crop damage were compared between disrupted and untreated plots. In both field trials, the number of males captured in mating disruption plots was significantly reduced by 86% and 95%, respectively. Mating disruption at the initial dose of 62.5 g/ha of active ingredient gave inconclusive results, whereas the dose of 93.8 g/ha significantly lowered the mealybug density and modified the age structure, which showed a lower percentage of ovipositing females and a higher proportion of preovipositing females. Mating disruption did not affect negatively the parasitism rate, which was higher in the disrupted than in the control plots (>1.5-fold). Crop damage at harvest was very low in both field trials and did not differ between treatments. Mating disruption was effective in wide plots protected with dispensers loaded with 150 mg of the sex pheromone, showing its potential to be included in the overall integrated control programs in Mediterranean wine-growing regions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.